Friend
Professional
- Messages
- 2,653
- Reaction score
- 850
- Points
- 113
Fact-checkers tell why the number of fakes on the network continues to grow.
In August 2022, four Muslims were arrested in the Indian state of Assam, who were accused of deliberately causing devastating floods. These natural disasters affected the predominantly Hindu city of Silchar. Then a conspiracy theory began to spread on social networks that the criminals allegedly staged a real jihad. Despite the high-profile accusations, the police were unable to find evidence to support this version.
Shortly after the arrests, the BBC and the Indian fact-checking outlet Alt News conducted independent investigations. Researchers said that all the accusations against Muslims turned out to be false. However, some websites still continue to publish articles supporting this conspiracy theory and even benefit financially from advertising.
Using the Google AdSense program, publishers can earn between $10 and $20 for every thousand article views. There are serious questions about Google's controversial policies, which on the one hand claim to be fighting misinformation, and on the other hand continue to profit from ads placed on fake pages.
Bellingcat analyzed articles published between 2022 and 2024 that contained 17 previously debunked false claims. The materials were reviewed by accredited organizations of the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) and Alt News, and met the definition of "hate speech" according to Google standards.
A total of 53 unique websites were identified, including 21 media outlets, that published 91 articles spreading false information. Of these, 44 sites, many of which are well-known in the Indian disinformation environment, were actively making money from advertising through Google AdSense.
However, these may be just the tip of the iceberg, as the study covered only the material in English and a small part of the articles in Hindi. It is likely that the scale of the spread of false content and its monetization is much wider.
Google representatives claim that most articles with fakes do not violate their policies, and only those publishers who do violate are deprived of the right to participate in marketing campaigns. However, the company did not provide a list of blocked pages, despite Bellingcat's requests.
In 2017, Google implemented a new policy to remove ads not from the entire site, but only from individual pages. This allows offending sites to continue to make money from other articles, even if some of them are blocked. For example, OpIndia, one of the most prominent right-wing websites in India, continued to display Google ads, despite Bellingcat flagging fake articles.
Other advertising companies, such as Taboola and iZooto, also contribute to the spread of false content. Bellingcat found their ads on Newstrack Live, which falsely linked a Muslim protester to the al-Qaeda terrorist group. At the same time, neither Taboola nor iZooto commented on the situation.
However, Bellingcat was able to attract the attention of some brands whose banner ads were seen alongside hate content. For example, Temu removed its ads from several sites. Other companies such as Hiscox and Expedia also blocked ads on OpIndia after the researchers' appeal.
While Google claims that advertisers can control exactly where their ads appear, in practice, this proves to be challenging. Experts believe that the responsibility for funding hate content lies not only with advertising platforms, but also with the brands themselves.
Source
In August 2022, four Muslims were arrested in the Indian state of Assam, who were accused of deliberately causing devastating floods. These natural disasters affected the predominantly Hindu city of Silchar. Then a conspiracy theory began to spread on social networks that the criminals allegedly staged a real jihad. Despite the high-profile accusations, the police were unable to find evidence to support this version.
Shortly after the arrests, the BBC and the Indian fact-checking outlet Alt News conducted independent investigations. Researchers said that all the accusations against Muslims turned out to be false. However, some websites still continue to publish articles supporting this conspiracy theory and even benefit financially from advertising.
Using the Google AdSense program, publishers can earn between $10 and $20 for every thousand article views. There are serious questions about Google's controversial policies, which on the one hand claim to be fighting misinformation, and on the other hand continue to profit from ads placed on fake pages.
Bellingcat analyzed articles published between 2022 and 2024 that contained 17 previously debunked false claims. The materials were reviewed by accredited organizations of the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) and Alt News, and met the definition of "hate speech" according to Google standards.
A total of 53 unique websites were identified, including 21 media outlets, that published 91 articles spreading false information. Of these, 44 sites, many of which are well-known in the Indian disinformation environment, were actively making money from advertising through Google AdSense.
However, these may be just the tip of the iceberg, as the study covered only the material in English and a small part of the articles in Hindi. It is likely that the scale of the spread of false content and its monetization is much wider.
Google representatives claim that most articles with fakes do not violate their policies, and only those publishers who do violate are deprived of the right to participate in marketing campaigns. However, the company did not provide a list of blocked pages, despite Bellingcat's requests.
In 2017, Google implemented a new policy to remove ads not from the entire site, but only from individual pages. This allows offending sites to continue to make money from other articles, even if some of them are blocked. For example, OpIndia, one of the most prominent right-wing websites in India, continued to display Google ads, despite Bellingcat flagging fake articles.
Other advertising companies, such as Taboola and iZooto, also contribute to the spread of false content. Bellingcat found their ads on Newstrack Live, which falsely linked a Muslim protester to the al-Qaeda terrorist group. At the same time, neither Taboola nor iZooto commented on the situation.
However, Bellingcat was able to attract the attention of some brands whose banner ads were seen alongside hate content. For example, Temu removed its ads from several sites. Other companies such as Hiscox and Expedia also blocked ads on OpIndia after the researchers' appeal.
While Google claims that advertisers can control exactly where their ads appear, in practice, this proves to be challenging. Experts believe that the responsibility for funding hate content lies not only with advertising platforms, but also with the brands themselves.
Source
